Figured I'd post this here rather than clog up the Token thread.

Known by a number of monikers such as Cain’s tokens, McTurk Tokens, and Carter’s Token, to name but a few, the privately issued token coinage of 1830 was generally embraced by the population and circulated throughout the Isle along with many other types of small coins and tokens. In fact it seems the number of tokens issued was so great that it was reported an issue of coins for the Isle of Man had been released during the reign of George IV but in actuality it was the tokens of 1830, displaying poorly executed effigies of George III, that were mistaken for official government issues. 

Pence and halfpence tokens dated 1830 were first issued by John Cain, a miller and baker of Castletown due to a lack of small coinage on the isle. A shortfall of small coins was an ongoing issue throughout Britain, its commonwealths, and territories since the late 1700’s but by 1830 the small coinage crisis was easing in most parts of the Empire except for the Isle of Man. This was primarily due to governmental policies and that the Isle of Man had its own currency independent of Britain. One of the major factors for the loss of official “coppers” on the isle was that a Manx pence was valued at 14 pence to a British shilling, whereas 12 British pence were equal to 1 British shilling. Due to the lower value of the Manx currency, and since official Manx coins were similar in design and size to British coins, many coppers were removed from the isle and used in commerce in Britain at a profit of £2 for every £12 of Manx coinage illegally spent. This happened on such a scale that by 1830 the isle was almost completely void of official copper coinage.

The need for small denominated coins led to the further production of privately made tokens, even buttons with the shanks rubbed off were accepted, with some individuals profiting from the lack of coinage by importing tokens costing less than a pence or halfpence to purchase or produce and distributing them throughout the isle at a profit. The first mention of the 1830 “Cain” tokens that I’ve found is from a letter to the Editor of Mona’s Herald dated Friday, June 27^th 1834. In it the author speculates that “These tokens will certainly yield a very profitable return to the speculator, and will be a great “accommodation” to his purse, while he is saved from entering into any guarantee to the public for the loss which must be sustained when a proper coinage is issued from the Mint.”

(From Mona’s Herald, Friday, June 27^th, 1834)

Throughout the 1830’s, despite pleas from the public to do so, the Isle of Man legislative body, Tynwald, refused or failed to pass legislation to address the coin shortage. That is until 1839 when the last Manx coins were issued prior to assimilation to British coinage in 1840. The switch to British currency took place on September 21^st, 1840, after which “all copper coin of the currency of this Island, passing after the rate of fourteen pence, or twenty-eight half-pence, for the shilling British, shall cease to be current” and residents of the isle were forced to turn in whatever coinage they had in exchange for the British equivalent at the 14:12 rate. This led to mass rioting on the isle, referred to as The Copper Row, as residents were forced to turn in their “coinage” at a loss. Although some merchants such as John Cain, presumably the issuer of the 1830 dated tokens, gave the public additional time to turn in their currency. During the assimilation period most of the tokens of that time were removed from circulation, destroyed, and replaced with British coinage.

(From the Manx Sun, Friday, October 9^th, 1840)

Presumably the Cain tokens of 1830 were produced in that year but the earliest mention that I have found of them to date is from 1834 and while possible it is doubtful any were made after 1840. Regardless, it is mentioned in several references that the dies, or master dies, used to produce the tokens were passed down to members of Cain’s family and/or business associates, namely (John?) McTurk and a Mr. Carter. While the passing down of the dies and subsequent reissuing of tokens could explain why these tokens came to be known by several names it is also likely that the names simply refer to business that would accept or distributed the tokens. McTurk, and Carter being names of business owners on the Isle of Man where the tokens would have been used, and Mr. Cain being the sole documented issuer to date. It is also said that another person by the name of Mr. Christian, also a business owner on the isle, purchased a large packet of these tokens and issued them of his own accord, although I have never heard of them being referred to as Christian’s tokens. The passing down of the dies and purchase of tokens by Mr. Christian was evidently confirmed by the daughter and son-in-law of John McTurk. Below are examples of the pence and halfpence 1830 copper tokens from my collection.

The 1830 tokens were struck with coin alignment, as most official George III pence were save a few of the Maundy issues, which varied from the medal alignment of George IV coins. The pence (34mm) and halfpence (29.2mm) tokens of 1830 were approximately the same diameter as the circulating British coinage, a George IV pence having a diameter of 34mm and the halfpence 28mm respectively, but were significantly lighter and the flans thinner. A George III and IV pence at that time having a nominal weight of 18.9g and the halfpence 9.45g, while the 1830 token pence and halfpence having nominal weights of 14.12g and 6.29g. The thinner flans likely led to striking issues with the tokens as all of the design details rarely, if ever, fully struck up. The most problematic areas being the bust of George III on the obverse and the “BLI” in “PUBLICK”, as well as the diamond and bar ornaments () on the reverse. The bust having been cut in higher relief than any other detail on both denominations and the “BLI” in “PUBLICK” on the reverse being directly aligned with the high points of the bust on the obverse. Examples of both denominations will show weakness in these areas, and it is not uncommon to find pieces where the “L” is not visible at all.

On the obverse of the pence the depth of relief on the cheek of the bust, and the thinness of the flan, was sufficient in ensuring that the bottom of the “L” in “PUBLICK” almost never struck up at all with portions of the surrounding letters often showing much weakness. For the halfpence, the bust being positioned more favorably in relation to the word “PUBLICK”, the letters typically struck up slightly better than those on the pence but the diamond with bar detail above will often display strike weakness as the right shoulder of the bust was cut to sufficient depth to prevent it from fully striking up. Also, depending on die orientation, as many pieces were struck with the dies having been rotated, the weakness in the details mentioned above will vary slightly from piece to piece save for the letter “L” as it is centrally located. 

The possible handing down of dies through family and business associates certainly could have led to the issuance of several die varieties as well as tokens being struck in different metal compositions such as copper, bronze, brass, and gunmetal, probably to lower the cost to produce them. In fact there are several varieties either listed or mentioned in various references but I tend to think there is some confusion between catalogers and too few examples for numismatists to study leading to the same varieties being listed more than once or fictitious ones having made their way into catalogs. Because of the seeming confusion and misinformation, or lack thereof, I am only going to mention the one variety that I can speak to, at least the only one that I feel is worth mentioning at the moment, a variety in brass. The examples in brass were produced using different dies than the copper examples above, they were also struck, as were the coppers, with coin alignment which is contrary to what some references state but that is not to say that some do not exist with medal alignment or, more likely, having been struck with rotated dies. The diameter and weight of the brass examples is comparable to the coppers, especially when circulation wear is taken into consideration. On the obverse of the brass pieces you will notice the differences in the details of the busts along with their positioning and that of the legends, along with the different font used for the numerals of the date and letters in the legends. On the reverse the fonts and spacing of the legends are also different than those of the copper examples, along with pellets having been added to the center of the quatrefoils to the left and right of “FOR”. The brass examples have strike weakness in the same general areas as their copper counterparts and, unlike the coppers, are extremely rare based on my experience. It is also possible, or likely, that they are contemporary counterfeits, or some refences mention the brass types as being patterns which seems doubtful. It also seems unlikely that the brass tokens were produced using dies that were handed down since they were produced using different dies, although the design is generally the same. Below are examples of the brass types from my collection.

In some references there is also listed a mule, the reverse die of the Isle of Man 1830 halfpence token having been paired with the obverse die of a token used, found, primarily on Prince Edward Island in Canada. This seems to not be entirely accurate to my way of thinking and I believe it more likely that the mint or business where Cain purchased the tokens and/or dies used similar designs for different tokens or used the same dies, intentionally mixing and matching them to produce different types of tokens and if that was the case you could scarcely call any of these mules. A Canadian Provencial halfpence token of the Ships, Colonies, and Commerce type used most frequently on Prince Edward Island (Breton-996, Charlton-PE9B1), bears a similar reverse to that of the copper 1830 tokens from the Isle of Man. While not an exact match to any of the Isle of Man copper 1830 halfpence tokens I’ve viewed, it does appear to have an identical, or nearly so, reverse to that of the Isle of Man brass 1830 halfpence token. Below is an image of an example of the Canadian type sold at Heritage Auctions, images by NGC, not owned.

The same or similar obverse die was used to strike halfpence tokens bearing a different reverse which, to the best of my knowledge, was only used for tokens in circulation on Prince Edward Island (Bretton-995, Charlton-PE9A). Below is an image of an example sold at Heritage Auctions, images by NGC, not owned.

Both types of Canadian tokens were found in large quantities on Prince Edward Island and supposedly circulated into the early 20^th century. It is thought that the date of 1815 was used to circumvent Canadian laws regarding the importation/production of tokens, and that the token with the “FOR / PUBLICK / ACCOMODATION” reverse was produced in England between 1830-37. Whether or not John Cain, the original issuer of the Isle of Man tokens, knew or was responsible in any way for the production and or selling/distribution of the tokens used on Prince Edward Island in Canada is unknown to me. It seems likely that the “mule” never saw use on the Isle of Man but was produced exclusively for sale to traders desperate for small change, who then brought sizable amounts with them to Prince Edward Island. Although at least one reference specifically states that the “mule” circulated on the Isle of Man, though there is no evidence to satisfactorily prove this from what I’ve seen, and in fact some references speculate that members of the Cain family relocated to Prince Edward Island taking dies to produce these tokens with them. I don’t know if the whole truth will ever be known about the origin and history of these tokens but the search will continue regardless. The Canadian Ships, Colonies and Commerce token with the similar reverse to the 1830 Isle of Man brass halfpence token is currently listed in both countries’ catalogs.